"otnmbrd" wrote in message
.70...
"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in
news:4718ed10
:



Your conclusion is simplistic and unrealistic. These are the facts:

1) both vessels share some part of the blame for the collision as is
always the case anytime two vessels collide.

2) the greater portion of the blame (90%) lies with the larger vessel
in
the foreground. This was the give-way vessel and he should never have
allowed that close quarters situation to take place. A simple VERY
SMALL
turn of the wheel to starboard BEFORE the close quarters situation
occurred would have avoided the close quarters situation and no
collision would have occurred.

3) the reason the smaller vessel shares some share of the blame is he
failed to take appropriate action to avoid a collision when it became
apparent the larger vessel was not taking the action required of it
by
the rules.

I'm always happy to educate a so-called professional who's view of
the
world is warped because he thinks "might makes right" as evidenced by
that ignorant last statement that the little boat get the hell out of
the way of the larger boat. Sorry, but the rules don't allow that.
The
rules REQUIRE the stand-on vessel to maintain course and speed until
it
becomes apparent that the give way vessel is causing a close quarters
situation and a danger of collision exists. Then and only then is the
stand on vessel required to take action to avoid a collision. Now,
run
along and review the Rules of the Road. It looks like you need to
brush
up.

Wilbur Hubbard




You need to read Rule 17 again and learn to look futher than the tip
of
your nose when viewing a video.


That's exactly what I was talking about in the above paragraph.

Wilbur Hubbard

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in news:471a52a8$0
:



You need to read Rule 17 again and learn to look futher than the tip
of
your nose when viewing a video.


That's exactly what I was talking about in the above paragraph.

Wilbur Hubbard



I saw what you were talking about, which is why I said you need to read it
again